Trial reportFrontiers in child and adolescent psychiatry2026
Usability testing of a digital tool to support behavioural activation for depression with young people aged 12 to 18.
Trial report in Frontiers in child and adolescent psychiatry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Adolescents with depression cannot access timely support due to pressures on specialist mental health services. We developed and tested a manualised version of behavioural activation-a brief psychological intervention-for delivery in the community by non-specialists. We digitalised the paper version of the behavioural activation manual as a more accessible and user-friendly route for completing therapy tasks. Methods: Young people who received manual-based behavioural activation as part of a large trial were invited to test the digital tool. Following a demonstration, participants were asked to use the digital tool in their own time over 4 weeks, completing tasks such as activity scheduling that they had previously completed using pen and paper. Participants then attended a one-to-one interview lasting approximately 30 min to provide feedback on the digital tool. All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim and analysed using Template Analysis. Results: Overall, 14 participants, aged 13-to-17-years Conclusions: Overall, the young people perceived the digital tool to be a useful and accessible resource that could support their mental health journey, both during and after therapy. The digital tool's features for planning, reflection, and visualizing progress were particularly valued. Identified improvements included the incorporation of reminders, in-app guidance, customization options, and a journalling feature to enhance engagement and the therapeutic value of the digital tool. Clinical Trial Registration: https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN57377955 Identifier: ISRCTN57377955.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.